Next life, when faced with a choice of something stupid to do, can I pick something else?

To both Orolon and Mr. Truth,
Unquestionably, the polygraph is psuedo-science...a bogus tool used to ilicit confessions.
Now...let me play devils advocate.  I have sat in groups and listen to sex-offender after sex-offender who has failed his polygraph admit to more molestations or brutal, inhuman sex acts of that nature.  If it hadn't been for the psuedo-science of the polygraph, they would have never admitted these incidents.  Some of the gentlemen had their probation revoced and were thrown in jail, where I believe the belong (if they can't keep from re-offending) and some where given second chances.

If we take the polygraph away completely and say, just ask nicely these offenders if they are re-offending, do you really think they will tell the truth?
Where do we draw the line?
Is saving a little girl from getting ass-raped by her father less important that banning an un-scientific, bogus, piece of fakery like the polygraph?   

That is the question I ask, after sitting through these groups and seeing this.  For myself, choosing never to get drunk at a frat party and "whip it out", is an easy choice.  But it seems that poeple who molest can't seem to make this choice so easily, maybe because of some deep level of addiction.  Sure, we are violating their rights with the polygraph.  But what other interrogation method works?
What about those drugs that you hear about in Spy movies that make people confess to things?  Could we use those on violent sex offenders such as molesters?

-OkieBoy

Ok, let me continue playing devil's advocate.
You said, "I happen to believe the use of the polygraph does more harm than good."
In the case of hard-core, habitual sex-offenders, the group that I mentioned it is hard to see how else they are going to be scared into at least trying to tell the truth...how can the polygraph do more harm than good?
You sound like you had/have a pretty decent group, but I have seen several hard-core child molesters confess in the past six months soley because they succuumbed (spelling?) to the psuedo-science of the polygraph.
Doesn't the end justify the means in the case of little children being spared?

-Okieboy

Orolon,
Interesting question you pose,
>>>Would you sacrifice your freedom so the machine could remain in use to save the children? 

I really can't answer it right now.  It is something I must ponder.  If I knew for sure that my freedom was weighed against the innocence of young children, then the logical answer would be Yes, I would sacrifice my freedom.  But the emotional, more human answer would be No.  Given the question, I can't truly say what my answer would be.

>>>It is quite rare for a multiple-victim habitual violent offender to get a probation sentence. Most get a prison sentence and are then committed to an institution when and if they get paroled. 

My state doesn't consider sex-crimes, habitual or not, an "insanity" and so sex criminals are never sent to institutions.  Many of the gentlemen in my groups have served 20 years or so in prison and are on parole or probation.  Many of them are looking at ten to twenty years probation, with maditory therapy and polygraph testing the entire time.

And I agree with you that modern therapy has taken great strides.  Cognitive Behavorial therapy in particular seems the best method when approaching sex crimes.  But sadly, many cognitive behavorial therapists have fallen prey to the belief in the psuedo-science of the polygraph.

Saidme,

You made a good point regarding the 91% claim by Orlan.  However you are asking a question analogous to one you have never answered before when asked.  Correct me if I am wrong.

How can you claim a cetain perentage accuracy rate regarding your poly when your only verification would be corraborating confessions or hard proof?

Saidme,
   
You write:

Quote:


We rest our case and checkmate, pal.   

thank you for the info, and also, thank you for the referal to SOhopeful.  I've written them and am waiting to hear back.   

Quote:

That's okay, there are those who will and have done that for you (NAS report, to name one). "Very, very, very accurate?" You mean, you can be more "accurate" than the roughly 80% accuracy rate of the software (using Polyscore as an example)? How can that be? Subjectivity on your part? Is that what allows you to pump out reports saying "It is the expert opinion of this examiner..." saying an examinee was deceiptful? Because you are so sure you and your "instrument" are so "very, very, very accurate," can you tell us how many people you've bent over with a false positive/deception indicated report?

My personal experience, which happens to be just as valid as yours, is that the polygraph is far, far, far from being very, very, very accurate.